Church Organizations Dispute Funds Use
Episcopal News Service. March 22, 1979 [79091]
New York -- Access to nearly $70,000 in designated gifts has apparently created a rift between two nominal "sister" organizations of the Episcopal Church.
The dispute arose when the National Institute for Lay Training met in early March, reduced the size of its board from 16 to nine members and formally ratified a change in direction that appears to mean cutting all ties with the Church Army Society.
In 1975, the Institute was established as the legal successor to the 45-year-old Church Army, U.S.A. This was done in an effort to broaden the funding and operating base of the Army and required the consent of a majority of Church Army workers. Shortly after, the workers reconstituted themselves as the Church Army Society. The changes gave the Institute access to $278,562.18 in Church Army funds, including over $68,000 which had been given in memorial and other designated gifts to the Army.
Society spokesmen maintain that the original understandings included the continuation of the Army's residential training program, staff and financial support to the Society and recruitment and training for Army workers. The Institute is ending the residential training -- called by a spokesman "not cost-effective" -- and shifting to running regional training programs around the Church.
The Society felt that since the Institute was no longer prepared to administer the restricted funds as intended by the donors, those funds should be turned over to the Society. They won support for this point from a number of Church leaders involved in the 1975 action, including the Rev. H. Boone Porter, now editor of The Living Church who was then the Church Army board chairman. "I am delighted that the Institute has this new direction, this new field in which they can offer ministry," Dr. Porter said. "But, the corollary to that is that they should not finance this new direction with funds that are specifically designated. We have to respect the wishes of the donors and the integrity of the stewardship process."
A spokesman for the Institute disputes this, saying that the Institute is legal successor to the Church Army and that "in fact, the same corporation came out of that meeting as went into it only with a different name."
The same spokesman said that as the legal successor, they "could no more turn over their assets to the Boy Scouts than to the Society."
Society officers -- who presented their petition without the aid of legal counsel -- were informed that they could not exercise their votes on the Institute board on the issue because that would create a conflict of interest.
In spite of the apparent setback, the Society is moving ahead, according to a recent statement, with recruitment and training efforts and will announce specific steps at the General Convention in Colorado in September.